Working As Intended

Anyone with a modicum of American civics and history education knows that our President is selected via process that is known as the Electoral College.  Votes for President are in reality votes for electors that will represent a given state when the College meets in the weeks following the election.

But why use an intermediary organization?

At the time of our nation's founding, there was a concern that a candidate with regional appeal would be able to garner enough votes from a few populous states to win in a straight popularity election.  The use of the Electoral College was intended to cause candidates to campaign more broadly in order to demonstrate their appeal to a greater cross section of the electorate.

While there are those that suggest that the 2000 election was a fluke, I strongly contend that it was proof that the Electoral College system was functioning as intended.  While Mr. Gore did receive more popular votes, he failed to win enough electoral votes to win the presidency.  A look at the county-by-county map from that election clearly shows Mr. Gore as appealing almost uniformly to a select group of urban centers.

Of course, let's be honest with one another.  The closeness of that election clearly indicates that Mr. Bush could have done more to broaden his support among voters.  It was a close election after all.

In the wake of the 2000 election, we were treated to all manner of leftish initiatives to abolish the Electoral College in favor of using the popular vote.  Apparently, they could not conceive of a condition where a Democrat might beat a Republican in the Electoral College while losing the popular vote.

More recently, there has been the news of GOP initiatives in a few states to change the state election laws to split those electoral votes based on voting trends within the respective congressional districts.  The theory is that this change will make the GOP more competitive in future Presidential elections.  It is based on looking backwards at the 2012 election where Mr. Obama won a number of crucial "winner takes all" states by very narrow margins.

These current initiatives are as idiotic as the prior attempts to convert us to using the popular vote.  In fact, they are nothing more than an attempt to move us partially down the road to using the popular vote.  Apparently, today's GOP cannot conceive of a condition where a Republican could lose to a Democrat under their proposed distribution of electoral votes where they might win under the current "winner takes all" system used in most states.

That last item is pretty important.

There have been all manner of hyperbolic claims about the GOP "rigging" future elections or "stealing" future elections with these proposals to alter the distribution of electoral votes.

Bullshit.

Excuse the language, please.

Nebraska and Maine currently use a proportional distribution of their electoral votes and have done so for years.  The Constitution permits states to determine how their electoral votes will be distributed.  The current "winner takes all" approach that is used in most states is legitimate only because it represents the current election laws of those states.  Those state legislatures can legitimately decide to use some different system at any time.

Again, let's be honest with one another.  America is significantly divided.  Dense urban centers and many of the surrounding suburbs support Democrats almost exclusively.  Less dense urban centers, associated suburbs, and rural American support Republicans almost exclusively.  These two groups have decisively different views about the role of government in our lives.  Until that difference of opinion gets resolved, I do not see our political tensions as abating any time soon.

But as long as actions taken by either side are kept within the law, charges of "rigging" or "stealing" elections are entirely out of place.

Universal "Christ"

Or at least, the universal application of "Christ"...in comic strips!  What an asshole.

Who Invented The Wheel?

While it probably was not the late Johnny Hart, he probably should get an honorable mention for the invention of the Solowheel.  Found via the Chicago Tribune.

Making Hell

Zack Kopplin of Louisana made the news a couple weeks back.  He has apparently spent most of his high school career and part of his college career fighting against a law that essentially took science out of the science classroom and replaced with religion.

Good for him.  Keep it up.

Parenthetically, I disagree with his take on global warming.  There are some reasonable scientific criticisms of some of the work that has been done in this area.  Real science involves testing theories for weaknesses rather than shouting "the science is settled".  No real scientists ever believe that science is "settled".

At least, not without a few hundred years of experience.  And anthropogenic global warming lacks that sort of experience by a few hundred years.

But I would expect that reasonable people of science should be able to rationally discuss those differences of opinion without resorting to "the Bible says" or "the science is settled".

A Big Cup

Very funny ad.  Pity some folks don't have a sense of humor.

Book Recommendation - Lucifer's Hammer

A comet comes dropping into our solar system from the reaches of space between the stars.  Astronomers and physicists believe it will pass close to the Earth.

But exactly how close?

"Lucifer's Hammer" is the tale of a comet that travels around our sun and then sprays the surface of the earth with disastrous results for humanity.  It is the tale of the humanity that survives...barely...the impact of several mountains upon the earth, the earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis hundreds of feet tall, fires, floods, famine, and humanity itself.

Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle tell their story from several different perspectives; one of the discoverers of the comet, the producer/director that prepares a documentary series on the comet, a couple government scientists, a US Senator, a thug/community activist, an Army sergeant, a postal carrier, an engineer in charge of building a nuclear power plant, four astronauts, and the friends, family, and co-workers that surround them.  Some survive.  Most don't.  Most of the survival isn't pleasant.  Some isn't too bad.

I'd rather have electricity, modern medicine, technology, and all that entails. 

For the first half of the book, I was pretty certain that this book wouldn't make my book recommendation series.  Due to the number of characters, the book jumps quite a bit from scene to scene.  While I have read many books that use the same plot device, in this case it was a bit difficult to mentally separate the people and scenes so that the context of the progressing story would remain intact.

By comparison, the books of George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Fire and Ice" series unfold in a dozen locations across two different continents.  The characters and locations are described in sufficient detail and exist with sufficient diversity that jumping from scene to scene and character to character does not detract from the story.

And then the comet struck.  After that point, I behaved in a most disreputable fashion; reading until way past midnight when I clearly should not.

Imagine a world where a diabetic scientist chooses to manufactures mustard gas and catapults instead of developing a means of manufacturing insulin.  And is considered a hero for his fatal choices.

Imagine a world without technology.  A world where a simple lathe would be a miracle.  A world where either your moral calculus shifts, or you die.  A world where an eight hour work day and a five day work week are luxuries.


I'd rather not.  But for 629 pages, I did.

Buckley And Allen

A humorous exchange between two most unlikely people; William F. Buckley and Woody Allen.

Turn down the sound on your speakers.  The audio is quite loud.

Arming 12 Year Olds

In the news this past week was the story of a 12 year old girl that shot an intruder to her home in self defense.

A day off for fall break was anything but relaxing for a 12-year old Bryan County girl, when an intruder broke into her home on Michael Avenue.

Deputies say, the girl was home alone when a man she'd never seen before, rang the front doorbell. They say when no one answered the door, the man went around to the back of the house and kicked a door open. That's when authorities say, the girl grabbed a gun and hid in a bathroom closet.

The right person came out on top in this instance.  One should shudder at the possibilities after an grown man gets hold of an unarmed 12 year old girl.

While no one should wish for such a young girl to find herself in such a position, everyone should be glad that she was able to fend off her attacker.

[a day or so later]

Call this another one where a few moments of reflection would be wise.

I'm not suggesting that we arm 12 year olds.  I also wonder about parents that leave guns loose where 12 year olds can find them.  I believe the phrase "it just ain't right" was invented for such things.

However, we don't know....

• the girl
• her family (were they among the working poor?  did they spend the babysitting money on drugs?)
• the neighborhood where they live (leaving the home may not have been a good option)
• their access to decent childcare/supervision ($3 an hour for childcare is a killer if you only make $11 an hour.
• if something unusual happened where she was left alone (she expect to be met by an adult and wasn't)
• if she was taught firearms safety (that's good parenting)
• if she was taught firearms usage (also good parenting)
• if her folks were ordinary, law abiding citizens
• if her folks were drug dealers
• or anything else about the circumstances

My sole point is to indicate that guns are used for legitimate self defense purposes.  More frequently than the ideologues that want to curtail gun rights will admit.  Absent evidence that this little girl was a criminal, this was such a legitimate self defense use.

Infuriating Muslims

Recent news suggests that while terrorist jihadis are a problem, they are not the only problem.  Perhaps they are not the biggest problem.

While China remains a communist nation, that government does not practice the brutal form of communism used by Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro, and similarly "enlightened intellectuals".  Yet those government apparatchiks still cling to the notion that individual belief is a suitable subject for government interference and direction.

Muslims living in China's western provinces have long been brutalized by China's government despite being overwhelmingly peaceful.  While they cling to the idea of an independent state, they do not act on this belief in any meaningful way.

But Beijing insists that there can be but one thought on this subject; subservience and acceptance of China's rule.  Their way of dealing with peaceful Muslims?

They burn the Muslim's mosque to the ground.  As with the Buddhists of Tibet, the Muslims of the western reaches of China have an absolute right of conscience; to believe in their religion without interference from the state.  The reaction of those Muslims was predictable and justified.

While an American government indebted to the Chinese government may find it tough to criticize such savagery, I do not. Communism....a slightly less brutal form of communism....is still alive in the world and a threat to any who profess a love of individual liberty.

Changing The Game

Terrorism has long been funded by petro-dollars.  Ironically or otherwise, the oil barons of the Middle East have sold us oil and then funneled a portion of those profits into organizations like Al Qaida.

Now we find that the recent energy boom in the U.S. due to new technologies for recovering shale oil have caused us to increase production.  The increase is enough that we may surpass Saudi oil production before the decade is over.

It is possible that other nations with significant shale reserves may follow in our footsteps.

Which would leave the Saudis with far fewer oil consumers and far more oil exporting competitors.

Good.  Let 'em eat sand for a while.

Who Is Jerome Silberman?

Gene Wilder.

A great interview of Gene by Ernie Manouse.

Professionalize! Federalize?

I don't know much about this chap, Alex Jones.  But it appears as though he has poked the TSA one too many times.  As a result, he is harassed by TSA agents every time he flies.

I seem to recall that some Democrats were making the assertion that "when you federalize, you professionalize" during the debates over the formation of the TSA.

This is apparently what the TSA considers to be "professional" conduct.  They are doing it wrong.  Trust me.

Book Anti-Recommendation - Why We Suck

If you read about a book here, then you should assume that I found reading it to be reasonably enjoyable.  I read a lot of things that are not necessarily very satisfying to me.  I don't talk about those disappointing reads because someone else might find them to be very enjoyable.

There are good reasons for different literary genres.

I picked up Denis Leary's "Why We Suck" at a used book store.  I like Mr. Leary's comedy.  I enjoy most of his television and movie roles.  He tends to be fairly libertarian in his outlook, so I figured that there would be moments of intense enjoyment and perhaps some modest validation.

And there were a some of both inside.  There were other sections that came from a more challenging perspective.  None of us ever agrees on everything.  So onward I read.

Until he started taking potshots at kids with mental and developmental handicaps.  There are somethings I just can't do.  Cracking wise about kids with those kinds of challenges is one of them.

I understand the larger point he was trying to make.  There are some kids...hell, even some adults...that have never had to learn the sort of self control needed to successfully operate in a cooperative society.  Some folks have other social difficulties.  The "Revenge of the Nerds" franchise is a pretty good example of otherwise normal people that have some social issues.

But Mr. Leary distinctly does not differentiate the target of his criticism from kids with some more serious issues.  The word "retard" is frowned upon for school aged kids.  Adults should simply know better.

And so his book is due to presently join the rest of the refuse in my garbage can.  I can think of no more appropriate disposition for it.

At least I bought it used.

The Record

I try to keep the titles for each entry by turns entertaining, obscure, and tempting in case that is all someone gets before they visit.  By the time some folks are done, I image that some will think of "record" as in a "broken record" that skips will think of a "record" as in a "broken record" that skips will think of a "record" as in a "broken record" that skip.

Ahem.  Where was I?

My digital basket of interesting items includes some things from before the election.  With Mr. Obama's second inauguration barely a day a way, I thought this might be an interesting time to look at his justification for re-election.

An article from Investor's Business Daily lays it out pretty well.  In summary:

1) He claims that Bush era tax cuts and deregulation caused the 2008 recession.

The record would suggest otherwise.

2)  His policies stopped another Great Depression.

Again, the data suggests that the recovery started before his policies were enacted.  Heck, the worst of the damage occurred before he was sworn into office!

3)  His policies are working.

Except, they aren't.  The economy is still sluggish.  His policies discourage investment in the U.S. that is needed to get us going full tilt again.  I talk to business owners and managers all the time and hear how they could be doing more, but won't until the current tax and spend environment ends.

4)  A slow recovery was inevitable.

Except that historically, the deeper the recession, the quicker the recovery.  Given how deep the recession was....and it was very deep....we should have zoomed out of it by now.  It is hard to zoom when you have an anchor shackled to your ankles.

5)  Nobody could have done better.

See item 4.  Every President coming out of a recession has done better.

One hopes that Presidential hubris will not delay a strong recovery any further.  That would represent real change, and progress to move us....forward, Mr. President.

Real World Translation

While this might seem like political "red meat", I do think this is a great summary of Mr. Obama's recent pronouncements on executive orders regarding gun sales.  I could summarize the summary as being multiple instances of:

• Tell government officials and agencies to do their jobs
• Waste money doing things that private agencies already do, and do better than government agencies.
• Spend money, sometimes without an obvious benefit
• Pretend that the ACA doesn't say what it actually says

The first one on the list is really very frustrating.  We have plenty of gun laws.  But they are not enforced.  We have plenty of policies.  But government agencies elect not to follow them.

Yet when a tragedy occurs, all we hear is a hue and cry for more gun regulations.  Why?

Or better yet, why not try using the current regulations and laws to do what we said needed to be done after the previous incidents?

One of the tools that federal prosecutors have is the ability to get felons convicted of gun crimes sentenced to facilities that are no where near their families.  I read about a prosecutor in either West Virginia or Virginia (I think) that was making full use of that law.  As as result, crimes committed with guns were down in this individual's area.

It seems that while the criminals were willing to commit crimes, they were unwilling to commit crimes that would keep them far from their families for extended periods of time.

Which might also suggest that we inconvenience them in other ways while they are incarcerated, but that is probably a discussion for another day.

So What Happens When...

...you take your boyfriend home to meet the family.

In Utah.  Where your family are Mormons.  And also Mexicans.

You might lose your cell phone on the way home from the airport with your boyfriend.  After announcing the loss to a couple of family members, you find the phone.

And when a family member calls hoping that someone will have found the phone, you might impetuously thrust your phone into your boyfriend's hands and tell him to pretend that he is a homeless person that has found this phone and that he lives at the end of the alley behind Arby's, behind a dumpster.

You might think that this sort of hijinks would end well.  But no.

Getting to the end is pretty damned funny though.

Head on over to The Moth and hear Elna Baker fill in the details.

Weather Vs. Climate

The news has infrequently indicated that our friends in Europe and Asia are having a brisk winter this year.  This is in stark contrast with the constant news reports about 2012 being the warmest year on record for the continental United States.

Since late November the country has shivered at an average of minus 3.8 degrees Celsius, 1.3 degrees colder than the previous average, and the chilliest in 28 years, state news agency Xinhua said on Saturday, citing the China Meteorological Administration.

So what is my point?  Simply that our media tends to focus on weather stories that support their general narrative.  In this case, stories that support the narrative that human activity are the primary force behind increasing global temperatures get pushed to the top of the heap.  These stories are prominently placed regardless of whether or not the weather they report really has anything to do with the larger issues of climate science.

Conversely, those that undermine the narrative are pushed aside.

What does it mean when the U.S. has the warmest year on record, but Asia and Europe go through a colder than normal winter?  Beats me.  We had a warm one.  They are in the midst of a cold one.  You suppose they might cancel one another out on a global basis?  I suppose they might.

But the better conclusion is that it is far more important to get news in a complete context.

You Mean Walter Is A Girl?

At least in this case:

A Georgia mother hid her two 9-year-old twins and shot an intruder, Paul Ali Slater, several times during a home invasion on Friday, according to multiple media reports.

The deaths of all those kids in Newtown, CT were a stark tragedy.

The deaths of that young woman and her twin children would have been no less of a tragedy.  It was averted by a woman with modest skills needed to defend her family from a committed and experienced criminal.

Fortunately, she also possessed the only tool that would have enabled her to put those skills into action.

It is regrettable that the many lives saved by guns each year are not weight weighed equally in the balance when the folks that want to ban guns get busy waving bloody shirts to justify curtailing our civil rights.

Book Recommendation - In The Name Of Rome

Adrian Goldworthy wrote "In The Name Of Rome" in 2003.  This tome presents the history of Roman military leaders that built and maintained the Roman Empire.

He tells the stories of political intrigue surrounding the selection of consuls that led the Roman army.  He presents the movement, battle skills and maneuvers they developed on their way to victory.

From a military history as well as a general military perspective, the book was a pleasant read.  The details were not so fascinating as to remain glued in my mind, so we are all lucky to be spared a longer recitation of those details.

However, the book did present one overarching narrative that I think is relevant to modern America.

At the beginning of the Roman Empire, serving in the army was considered to be a duty of every Roman citizen.  It was considered to be a near qualifying duty for those that wanted to hold power back in Rome.

This perspective changed over the course of the Empire.  Eventually, the military was formed with significant numbers from the outlying provinces.  Rome's leading citizens were too busy generating and consuming wealth to spend any significant portion of their lives defending the source of their relative liberty.

That sort of thing was farmed out to lesser men and foreigners.

This condition was one of the factors that led to the eventual demise of the Roman Empire.

When a nation can no longer persuade not only her citizens, but specifically her leading citizens to invest of themselves in that nation's defense, then that nation will shortly cease to exist.  Or at least it will cease to have the power and influence that it once enjoyed.

Robert Heinlein has suggested that there is a link between rights and responsibility as well as a link between responsibility and authority.  Each cannot exist unless it is in balance with the other.  Before one assumes political authority over others, one must submit completely to that same authority.  Where else can such complete submission occur but in the military?


In modern America, the trend for service in our military is for people from the central and southern states to serve.  Those from the seats of power....New York, LA, the New England areas...serve at a far lower rate.  Those that seek civilian and corporate leadership rarely send their children to serve as well.  We also routinely recruit from pools of immigrants as well as foreigners that apply to serve at our embassies around the world.

What will our future be if we cannot inspire future generations to see our nation as being worthy of the sacrifice of military service?  History does not suggest a positive outcome.

For those with an appreciation of military history, western civilization, and military tactics, "In The Name Of Rome" is a splendid book.

So What Happens When...

...your credit card gets stolen.

Well you hope the bank will stop the continuing theft.  Banks are pretty good about that these days.

And you might find some online purchases.  Unusual purchases.  Surprisingly, these unusual purchases had been shipped to someplace reasonably nearby.

Suddenly, it occurs to you that the last transaction where you gave someone your card number (as opposed to swiping it in person) was when you ordered pizza over the phone.  Putting two and two together, you visit the pizzeria with the intent of tracking down the miscreant that had just wrecked your life.

Instead you end up talking to the manager during the middle of the afternoon.  Then the mother of all coincidences occurs; the manager has to answer the phone to take a delivery order.  And the caller is using your credit card number to pay for your pizza.

Head on over to The Moth's website and listen to the rest of the story from Tristan Jimerson.

It just gets better and better.